Case 2401642/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Anwar Mehmood v House of Ethnic Foods Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2401642/2020
- Decision date
- 28 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Anwar Mehmood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Leeds on 13 to 17 June 2022, before Employment Judge D N Jones, the tribunal dismissed Mr Anwar Mehmood's claims for breach of contract, wrongful dismissal, holiday pay and unauthorised deductions from wages. Those claims were not upheld on the facts found by the tribunal.
The tribunal did uphold the unfair dismissal claim. It found that Mr Mehmood had been unfairly dismissed by House of Ethnic Foods Limited.
No remedy was awarded. The tribunal said it was not just and equitable to make a basic award because of the claimant's conduct before dismissal, and not just and equitable to make any compensatory award because of that same conduct and because, even if a fair procedure had been followed, the claimant would have been dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal unfair but made no award of remedy. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £0
- across all upheld claims
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.